What the newspapers are REALLY telling you without your knowing it.

I was reading this article from the
Washingto Post and noticed this graphic in the lower right hand side of the page:

I have studied a bit about subconscious communication as an artist and the psychology of body language and this photo is saying A LOT of in formation
to your subconscious about these candidates.

First, when you photograph a subject from below looking up it gives a phychological
aspect of a child and the person becomes an authority figure. So which candidates are they telling you are the authority figures? Which are they
telling you are not as authoritative?

Now let's look at the hand gestures. When you point your finger and go back and forth up and down you are using it as a club to beat your point into
the person. One candidate is doing this plus his fingers form a claw which inidicates he is about to rip or tear you apart. Which candidate is doing
this and what does it say?

Club
The wagging finger of admonition beats up and down as if striking the culprit. This can be with a stable hand and just a finger way. It may also be
done with the whole arm, giving an exaggerated striking movemen

Curved and separated fingers form a claw. With palm facing down, the claw may threaten to reach forward and grab, scratch or tear.

One of the candidates has his arms upraised with palms up. There are a couple messages in this. It is the classic I don't know, and frustration
gestures. The upraise palms is turning over control of the conversation to another party asking for their input. Why do you think they chose this
shot?

Raising the arms lifts something up. Done rapidly, it throws things into the air. With both arms, it exaggerates it further. A typical
two-arm-raising gesture is frustration, as everything that is weighing the person down with confusion is thrown up into the air. Coupled with a shrug
it indicates confusion ('I don't know!!').

Palms offered upwards are a common plea gesture, as if asking for alms. Palms downwards may ask a person to calm down.

One candidate is pounding his open hand on the table. There are several things going on at once here. Pounding the table is another aggressive gesture
literaly pounding into you. Having the palm down which is really highlighted by the photographer is literally holding you down.

Simulated aggression
Big emphasis often (but not always) uses simulated aggression, such as:
Pounding of a fist on the table or into palm of the other hand.

A hand with palm down may figuratively hold or restrain the other person. This can be an authoritative action ('Stop that now') or may be a
request ('Please calm down'). This also appears in the dominant hand-on-top handshake.

Several of them are literally talking out of the sides of their mouth, there is a reason we have the phrase "talking out of the side of your mouth"
meaning lieing. Now it is not always true, because Bell's Palsy and stroke and other things can cuase it. But absent some physical reason it does mean
exactly what the idiom says.

Also notice all but one have their lipsed pursed to speak.

Lips which are slightly parted can be a strong flirting signal, particularly if the lips are then licked and even more so if done whilst holding
the gaze of another person.
Parting lips is the first stage in speaking and may thus be a signal that the person wants to talk.

link
What do you think the message is when all but one candidate is doing this?

All of the candidates have their lips turned down except one.

Turned up
When the corners of the mouth are turned upwards, this can be a grimace of disgust or a smile of pleasure. In a grimace, the teeth are unlikely to be
shown (although toothless smiles are also common). Grimaces are often flatter and tenser.
A full smile engages the whole face, particularly including the eyes. Smiling with lips only is often falsehood, where the smiler wants to convey
pleasure or approval but is actually feeling something else.
Turned down
Corners of the mouth turned down indicates sadness or displeasure.
Some people are so miserable so often, this is the natural state of rest of their mouths (which is perhaps rather sad).

You might not realize you realize these things but you do. It is the language of the subconscious. We have 100k or so words in the English language
but over 750k catalogued gestures. And according to behavior psychologist we subconsciously take and believe the message from the gestures over the
words.

I gave the links from the internet, but I really got the information from several books I just read. Two great books I just read which i recommend to
anyone interested:

The definitive Book of Body Language by Alan and Barbara Pease.
Bodytalk The Meaning of Human Gestures by Desmond Morris.

Sorry for accidently pushing enter before I got the post finished, and haha to the troll below. I hope people will study and learn this because THIS
IS HOW THE CONTROL US SUBCONCIOUSLY. They know this stuff inside and out and use it on purpose for manipulation.

If you know it you can be less influenced by it and make up your own mind. If you don't you are more at their mercy and have no shields against it.
Let's take this info and deny ignorance

edit on 22-1-2012 by pianopraze because: accidentally hit enter before I had the post done

That's exactly what I thought, too. The positioning of them on this photo is telling in itself. Obama seems to have been an afterthought. Not sure
he should have been included with this bunch at all though.

I could have told you two years ago, the way the media is. Barack Obama is winning this election regardless of how the people feel. Call it
illuminati, call it a conspiracy. I think Obama just calls it Winning.

Expert and spot on breakdown of this article OP! Goes without saying, S+F

This is one of the better threads ive seen on ats in a while. Its not a far fetched or unbelievable conspiracy, just a very obvious attempt at
persuasion. And the picture alone was more than enough for me to realize where you were going with this, before i even read it.

I understand what you're saying, as I studied psychology at university for a short time and this is a very real and interesting subject. Although,
speaking as a photographer who has experience within the media, you get whatever shots you can, from the best angle you have access to, and let me
tell you, we're more concerned with composition and getting a semi-interesting shot, making sure the exposure is correct, making sure the subject is
in focus, than really taking into account how it will affect the subconscious of the masses.
It's true, editors will use whatever shots that are most associated with the story, obviously. E.g. a football player has been accused of physically
abusing his girlfriend, they might use a shot where it looks like he is stressed or under a lot of pressure, he might be in training and look like
he's concentrating or even a bit angry.

There are so many ways that you can look at this type of thing. Despite all of the talk of mind control and manipulation, I still strongly believe it
depends on the individual how they want to see things.

Very good post...I wouldn't have gone this in-depth in my analysis, but I have noticed they almost always display Ron Paul in a goofy-looking
fashion. Even though it's supposed to be subconscious, does that mean it will affect anyone including Paul supporters? Or does it just hold meaning
for the average sheep?

In any case, when I see the photo of Obama I can't help but think 'bought-out narcissist'. Nothing that he says holds any meaning to me; I look at
him as nothing more than a pathological liar with an agenda mirroring that of the corporate entities backing him. Yet sadly enough there are people
who still support him & will vote him in for a second term. Perhaps subconscious tricks play a part here?

Santorum looks confused.
Romney looks like he's scolding a child.
Gincrich looks disgruntled or angry about something.
Paul is making the gestures I do when arguing with stupid people.
Obama...I see that and all I can think is "horse".

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.